Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

William Soto v. Dr. Zhou

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


September 26, 2012

WILLIAM SOTO, PLAINTIFF,
v.
DR. ZHOU, DEFENDANT.

ORDER

Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed this civil rights action seeking relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge as provided by 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302.

On June 26, 2012, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations, which were served on all parties and which contained notice to all parties that any objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. Neither party has filed objections to the findings and recommendations.

Upon review of the record, the court declines to adopt the findings and recommendations. Under Woods v. Carey, 684 F.3d 934, 940-41 (9th Cir. 2012), an inmate must be given notice of the requirements for opposing a motion for summary judgment close to the time a motion is filed rather than at the beginning of the litigation. In this case the docket reflects that the notice was given on December 27, 2007, toward the beginning of this case. ECF No. 13.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The court declines to adopt the findings and recommendations filed June 26, 2012; and

2. The case is referred to the magistrate judge for further proceedings in light of Woods v. Carey.

20120926

© 1992-2012 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.